[bestbits] [governance] Call for making the IGF permanent

Stephanie Perrin stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca
Wed Sep 3 16:02:59 EDT 2014


thanks, I was going to propose everyone join an IGF accountability 
project, and we find funding for it.  I think government could be a good 
target for funds for that....or business.  Happy to pass the hat.  We do 
need it, but the IGF is at too immature a maturity level at the 
moment....needs a longer mandate and stable funding to get to the next level
Cheers, Stephanie
On 2014-09-03, 12:57, Lee W McKnight wrote:
> My cent:
>
> Split the difference.
>
> Everyone agrees/calls for a ten year planning horizon for UN participation in IGF;
>
> coupled with a call for greater multistakeholder participation in the -annual - review process for IGF accountability and transparency reasons.
>
> Everyone's a winner.
>
> Lee
>
>
> ________________________________________
> From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org <governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org> on behalf of George Sadowsky <george.sadowsky at gmail.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, September 3, 2014 12:08 PM
> To: Civil IGC Society Internet Governance Caucus -; Milton L Mueller
> Cc: Pranesh Prakash; Jeanette Hofmann; Best Bits
> Subject: Re: [governance] [bestbits] Call for making the IGF permanent
>
> I agree with Prakesh also.
>
> George
>
>
> On Sep 3, 2014, at 10:04 AM, Milton L Mueller <mueller at syr.edu> wrote:
>
>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> I will have to be the one to provide that "almost" to that unanimity.
>>> Speaking for myself, I do not support making the IGF a permanent body.
>>>
>>> The IGF has to be relevant and has to deliver results, and we should push for
>>> accountability of the IGF.  Making it permanent isn't really going to help
>>> accountability of the IGF (just as having the IANA contract be renewable has
>>> helped keep ICANN more accountable so far, though the analogy is not perfect).
>>> I would support making the evaluation process (for renewal of the IGF's term)
>>> more participative and transparent and, yes, more "multistakeholder".
>> Agree with Pranash
>> --MM
>> ____________________________________________________________
>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>>      governance at lists.igcaucus.org
>> To be removed from the list, visit:
>>      http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
>>
>> For all other list information and functions, see:
>>      http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
>> To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
>>      http://www.igcaucus.org/
>>
>> Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t
>
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>       bestbits at lists.bestbits.net.
> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit:
>       http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/bestbits/attachments/20140903/555e1280/attachment.htm>


More information about the Bestbits mailing list